The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
100% locked on FACT1
-
The price is agreed except sell on fees = the price is not agreed.
Thanks @Taxi_Lad for sharing, I hope it gets done but despite the 2 weeks comment I still feel there is a long way to go. Would not surprise me if RD kept us until the summer as I thinks Lookman will be sold and he can pocket the sell on first.2 -
Raith_C_Chattonell said:
Aha my suspicions confirmed, there's no such thing as an NDA to a cab driver ... fortunately,
34 -
What can I say? She was so niaveValleyGary said:Raith_C_Chattonell said:Aha my suspicions confirmed, there's no such thing as an NDA to a cab driver ... fortunately,
5 -
You have been told to back up your information with a link at least!ValleyGary said:Raith_C_Chattonell said:Aha my suspicions confirmed, there's no such thing as an NDA to a cab driver ... fortunately,
{searches for a box of tissues in anticipation}3 -
Doesn't the potential sell on fee for players go up and down?
I reckon Gomes sell on fee must go up and down like a nuns draws the amount of injuries he gets.0 -
A whole box?!! I'm impressed!soapy_jones said:
You have been told to back up your information with a link at least!ValleyGary said:Raith_C_Chattonell said:Aha my suspicions confirmed, there's no such thing as an NDA to a cab driver ... fortunately,
{searches for a box of tissues in anticipation}
4 -
@ValleyGary - I for one would like to thank you for taking on the arduous task of researching for that screen grab. It must’ve been very hard.13
-
We'll soon have enough for a new 'Carry On Cabbie' script.....much more entertaining than all this takeover nonsense!AddickUpNorth said:@ValleyGary - I for one would like to thank you for taking on the arduous task of researching for that screen grab. It must’ve been very hard.
5 -
I know RD doesn't do common sense.
However, if he is willing to lose, let's call it £6M pa, then logic might suggest the sell on deals, plus whatever else he wants, is worth more than £6M to him ?0 - Sponsored links:
-
What happened to this paperwork that Aussie's had not submitted?1
-
What is the fee likely to be for a very good young player, but one who is only on the fringes of a mid table Premier League side?Athletico Charlton said:The price is agreed except sell on fees = the price is not agreed.
Thanks @Taxi_Lad for sharing, I hope it gets done but despite the 2 weeks comment I still feel there is a long way to go. Would not surprise me if RD kept us until the summer as I thinks Lookman will be sold and he can pocket the sell on first.
What would Roland's share be?
Would it be worth his while to incur monthly losses in the hope of a summer sale of Lookman?
Only asking because I’ve no idea if the maths add up.
I know even less about the Gomez situation.
The other question is, how common is it for an owner to sell a club but keep a financial interest in future sell on revenue? Seems odd to me.
I think the issue is that Roland’s model for running Charlton was to finance the operation by selling our best young talent, and he probably feels he did the spending bit without fully exploiting the revenue bit. Toughsh1tbananas I say.2 -
I raised the sell-on fees probably being a sticking point way back. If (and its a big IF) sell-on fees were included in the deals for Gudmunsson, Pope, Lookman, and (especially) Gomez (valued at around £50m) and now Grant. Maybe also Cousins and Konsa. If based on appearances, England caps, etc. then we are probably talking about a substantial amount of money and RD will want his cut - but, of course, none of it is guaranteed. Cannot see Gomez leaving Liverpool for many years...1
-
So its definitely aint RedBull then ????Taxi_Lad said:Wow!!!!!!! Never been itk til now !! Just had a 15 min conversation with Keith Harris in my cab.
As open as he could be. Main points were;
RD very difficult man to deal with. Obstinate and refusing to put any more money in
Price agreed but structure of payment (Gomez / Lookman sell ons etc)
Aussies still include Andrew Muir as main consortium member
Aussies will be good for us if they can get it over the line
No other bidders as far as he’s aware
LdT is a nice guy but is RDs man and is working on his behalf hence the comment re the Aussies having some explaining to do when it’s all over is bollox. All down to RD and his stubbornness
(dont shoot the messenger) he said it’s very close. He even hinted at the dreaded “2 weeks”
Aussies not worried about timing of purchase I.e. they wouldn’t wait til end of season just cos transfer window closed
Everything seems in line with as per @JamesSeed has reported. He now tops my itk list of credibility
did he mention my survey??10 -
Oh blimey, here we go again!2
-
13
-
@bertpalmer
I for one was looking forward to it1 -
So if RD & The Aussies won't sufficiently budge on what they will agree on, the stand off will continue.
Presumably, The Aussies are banking on RD reducing his demands on the basis of his continuing losses.0 -
It's happening, #donedeal, imminent, 72 hours, no ifs no buts.1
-
Easy now AUNAddickUpNorth said:@ValleyGary - I for one would like to thank you for taking on the arduous task of researching for that screen grab. It must’ve been very hard.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
You could probably get away with a survey now as the flags have been removed.bertpalmer said:
So its definitely aint RedBull then ????Taxi_Lad said:Wow!!!!!!! Never been itk til now !! Just had a 15 min conversation with Keith Harris in my cab.
As open as he could be. Main points were;
RD very difficult man to deal with. Obstinate and refusing to put any more money in
Price agreed but structure of payment (Gomez / Lookman sell ons etc)
Aussies still include Andrew Muir as main consortium member
Aussies will be good for us if they can get it over the line
No other bidders as far as he’s aware
LdT is a nice guy but is RDs man and is working on his behalf hence the comment re the Aussies having some explaining to do when it’s all over is bollox. All down to RD and his stubbornness
(dont shoot the messenger) he said it’s very close. He even hinted at the dreaded “2 weeks”
Aussies not worried about timing of purchase I.e. they wouldn’t wait til end of season just cos transfer window closed
Everything seems in line with as per @JamesSeed has reported. He now tops my itk list of credibility
did he mention my survey??
A bit boring though.1 -
Ferryman said:
We used a 3rd party finance company in the Darren Bent sale.Cafc43v3r said:I am pretty sure sell on fees, like in this example, don't constitute 3rd party ownership, as defined. Mainly because RD would have no control over any further transfer, or lack of. Didn't Leeds United and later spurs raise money to by players from 3td party finance companies, who were due a % of future sales?
Two hopes of that and one of them is Bob.Covered End said:
As I said RD is determined to get all his money back by hook or crook.Henry Irving said:Thanks for sharing @Taxi_Lad
Interesting that I was guessing Harris was involved and seems he is.
So maybe sticking point is sell on fees. Greedy bastard Roland, you've sold them once but want more.
Of course, Harris will tell it from his point of view so isn't unbiased but if nothing else should be good for another 20 pages.1 -
Maybe that's his view?Covered End said:I know RD doesn't do common sense.
However, if he is willing to lose, let's call it £6M pa, then logic might suggest the sell on deals, plus whatever else he wants, is worth more than £6M to him ?
For example (all numbers made up), if Gomez was worth £30m last season, prior to the world cup, and presuming we have a 10% sell on fee (over and above the £3.5m that Liverpool paid), then that was worth around £3m to RD. But if he's now worth £50m, that shows a £2m increase in his book value to RD. If his apparent value increases next year by another £20m (and if van Dijk is worth that much, then why not!), then that is £2m each year on his value to RD. (He may or may not ever be sold, and values can of course go down as well as up!)
But if we use the same formula for Lookman, that could be worth £1m-£2m a year, and maybe with Gudmundsson, Pope, etc added in then RD could easily say that his "assets" are increasing in value what he is losing at CAFC (c£6m per season).
How he realises those assets, if ever, is another matter.2 -
I reckon they are bleeding him out.Covered End said:So if RD & The Aussies won't sufficiently budge on what they will agree on, the stand off will continue.
Presumably, The Aussies are banking on RD reducing his demands on the basis of his continuing losses.
If the scenario is that RD thinks he is entitled to all the sell-on clauses in the player sales under his stewardship, I could understand the issue.
As there is no guarantee if or when add-ons pay. Its the annualised value of these add-ons (which is difficult to establish as there is no guarantee) v the annualised losses that would form a book value and this maybe the reason that he was trying so hard to reduce costs wherever he could.
The Aussies may well be letting him realise his losses whist he holds out for potential future payments from the sales of Gomez, Lookman etc.4 -
He could do what we have apparently done before.....approach the current owning club and offer to accept a lower payment now in exchange for wiping out any possible future valued payment on initially agreed termsPedro45 said:
Maybe that's his view?Covered End said:I know RD doesn't do common sense.
However, if he is willing to lose, let's call it £6M pa, then logic might suggest the sell on deals, plus whatever else he wants, is worth more than £6M to him ?
For example (all numbers made up), if Gomez was worth £30m last season, prior to the world cup, and presuming we have a 10% sell on fee (over and above the £3.5m that Liverpool paid), then that was worth around £3m to RD. But if he's now worth £50m, that shows a £2m increase in his book value to RD. If his apparent value increases next year by another £20m (and if van Dijk is worth that much, then why not!), then that is £2m each year on his value to RD. (He may or may not ever be sold, and values can of course go down as well as up!)
But if we use the same formula for Lookman, that could be worth £1m-£2m a year, and maybe with Gudmundsson, Pope, etc added in then RD could easily say that his "assets" are increasing in value what he is losing at CAFC (c£6m per season).
How he realises those assets, if ever, is another matter.0 -
-
and they could say we'll pay you nothing as we do not intend to sell the palyerSuedeAdidas said:
He could do what we have apparently done before.....approach the current owning club and offer to accept a lower payment now in exchange for wiping out any possible future valued payment on initially agreed termsPedro45 said:
Maybe that's his view?Covered End said:I know RD doesn't do common sense.
However, if he is willing to lose, let's call it £6M pa, then logic might suggest the sell on deals, plus whatever else he wants, is worth more than £6M to him ?
For example (all numbers made up), if Gomez was worth £30m last season, prior to the world cup, and presuming we have a 10% sell on fee (over and above the £3.5m that Liverpool paid), then that was worth around £3m to RD. But if he's now worth £50m, that shows a £2m increase in his book value to RD. If his apparent value increases next year by another £20m (and if van Dijk is worth that much, then why not!), then that is £2m each year on his value to RD. (He may or may not ever be sold, and values can of course go down as well as up!)
But if we use the same formula for Lookman, that could be worth £1m-£2m a year, and maybe with Gudmundsson, Pope, etc added in then RD could easily say that his "assets" are increasing in value what he is losing at CAFC (c£6m per season).
How he realises those assets, if ever, is another matter.1 -
Yes, I was thinking the same.Pedro45 said:
Maybe that's his view?Covered End said:I know RD doesn't do common sense.
However, if he is willing to lose, let's call it £6M pa, then logic might suggest the sell on deals, plus whatever else he wants, is worth more than £6M to him ?
For example (all numbers made up), if Gomez was worth £30m last season, prior to the world cup, and presuming we have a 10% sell on fee (over and above the £3.5m that Liverpool paid), then that was worth around £3m to RD. But if he's now worth £50m, that shows a £2m increase in his book value to RD. If his apparent value increases next year by another £20m (and if van Dijk is worth that much, then why not!), then that is £2m each year on his value to RD. (He may or may not ever be sold, and values can of course go down as well as up!)
But if we use the same formula for Lookman, that could be worth £1m-£2m a year, and maybe with Gudmundsson, Pope, etc added in then RD could easily say that his "assets" are increasing in value what he is losing at CAFC (c£6m per season).
How he realises those assets, if ever, is another matter.
This could run indefinitely, unless one or both parties budge and come to an agreement.1 -
So, a case of who blinks first ?Covered End said:
Yes, I was thinking the same.Pedro45 said:
Maybe that's his view?Covered End said:I know RD doesn't do common sense.
However, if he is willing to lose, let's call it £6M pa, then logic might suggest the sell on deals, plus whatever else he wants, is worth more than £6M to him ?
For example (all numbers made up), if Gomez was worth £30m last season, prior to the world cup, and presuming we have a 10% sell on fee (over and above the £3.5m that Liverpool paid), then that was worth around £3m to RD. But if he's now worth £50m, that shows a £2m increase in his book value to RD. If his apparent value increases next year by another £20m (and if van Dijk is worth that much, then why not!), then that is £2m each year on his value to RD. (He may or may not ever be sold, and values can of course go down as well as up!)
But if we use the same formula for Lookman, that could be worth £1m-£2m a year, and maybe with Gudmundsson, Pope, etc added in then RD could easily say that his "assets" are increasing in value what he is losing at CAFC (c£6m per season).
How he realises those assets, if ever, is another matter.
This could run indefinitely, unless one or both parties budge and come to an agreement.
Does anyone know if the Rat has a nervous tic ?0 -
Precisely.FishCostaFortune said:What happened to this paperwork that Aussie's had not submitted?
A few weeks back an EFL official was quoted as saying neither the proof of funds and the names of the backers had been lodged.
Perhaps things have moved forward.1
